It took 2 World Wars to Destroy Britain and the Empire

[Sava]

Originally posted by Havak
Suex was seized illeaglly in 1956. And only the intervention of the US government stopped Britain and France crushing the seizure of our lawful property.

It is one of the most misguided things your country ever did, and it was one of the most direct causes for our government refusing to commit anything to Indochina a decade later. Whilst militarily not important a small British presence in that Theatre would have been priceless for you politically and may (nothing more than may) have helped change things. As it is we know what happened.

Do you not realise all countries make mistakes? You clearly have issues with Britain the way you words come across but, and open your eyes here, America is not perfect either.



And ask yourself how that comes across to people living in countries that were democracies (albeit limited) before your country even existed and who banned slavery fifty years before you (pretended to) after your civil war.

And if Britian were Imperial bullies remind me how you took control of Cuba and the Phillipines again?

Neither of our countries histories are perfect - I can see that, can you?

That's the whole point of this thread though.... in a pro-Brit thread... I have to bash them... I would have done the same thing to a pro-America thread.

I think America is worse than Britain because of the hypocrisy. Slavery is the prime example. IMO conservatives ruin America by forcing compromise on issues that are wrong. The liberals in America compromised on slavery with the conservatives until the Civil War started. And now, the liberals are forced to compromise on just about every other issue in order to maintain civility.

Guns are a perfect example. Americans will spend 4 billion dollars a day fighting terror attacks that killed 3,000... yet nearly 10,000 will die from gunshot murders in America. I doubt it would cost nearly 4 billion a day to get guns off the streets, yet we don't because conservatives shield themselves with the 2nd Amendment... yet when it comes to illegal searches... conservatives are the first to deficate on the 4th Amendment.

I got more.... start a bash America thread and I'll continue.

[Havak]

Similarly I have no wish to extend a bashing of America. It was balance I was looking for in the exchanges, and yes I did let myself be baited somewhat. Your point is well made, I had read the thread title as a statement of fact whereas I guess it can read as Pro-British drum rattling?

I am not defending the Empire or Imperialism as a concept, but rather our miltary conduct as the Empire. And it does need reminding to some US posters that your country too belatedly played the Imperial game.

I could carry on bashing both countries if needed, but on the whole I rather think both are not the best targets - there are worse nations around.

And lest we Brits feel too good about ourselves how many other nations fought a civil war to depose Royalty then invited them right back in for another 350 years of the right to bow and scrape?!

[The Andy-Man]

sava, i dontthink you know much about the rise anf fall of british power, and the fact that the UK has the 2nd highest industrial POTENTIAL (doesnt use it any more) inm Europe, it has a plentiful supply of Iron and coal, and high grade oil to. Small islands can be highly industrialiserd y'know, a la japan.

Britain became a great power because of good leadership and the willingness to gamble, and obviously its hegamonic power in the 19th was due to the financial income of the empire...

And the point of this thread was that Britain has maintained a power status *alothough a small one) dues to the fact of the 2Wars. without them Britian would have declined slopwly and painfully, violently trying to hold onto its empire.


as it stands, the UK is still a major economic and trade power, has the most elitist Military, and a fairly large military (still small in relative rerms, but 3carriers dont seem bad to me, along wit about 1000 tanks).

[Comrade Tribune]

Re: Re: Re: It took 2 World Wars to Destroy Britain and the Empire

Originally posted by ravagon
Are you offering Austrian soil for the battleground?

Good question.

U.S. are mostly a sea/air power. I think sinking their fleets and grounding their aircraft would suffice. But perhaps we should take some CivIII advice and also raze a few major cities, just to be on the safe side. I think Austria should be preserved for sightseeing, so we shouldn´t fight it out here. In the U.S. there is not much that is really worth keeping, therefore any WWIII land battles should probably be fought over there.

[The Andy-Man]

there is not much that is really worth keeping

except Jack Nicholson and his residence, and hooters bars

this topic kinda went off topic though

[Arrian]

Re: Re: Re: Re: It took 2 World Wars to Destroy Britain and the Empire

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune

U.S. are mostly a sea/air power. I think sinking their fleets and grounding their aircraft would suffice. But perhaps we should take some CivIII advice and also raze a few major cities, just to be on the safe side. I think Austria should be preserved for sightseeing, so we shouldn´t fight it out here. In the U.S. there is not much that is really worth keeping, therefore any WWIII land battles should probably be fought over there.

What a delightful fellow.

[steelehc]

Don't get me wrong. I like Britain. America's only true ally, and the only one that has stuck with us for a really long time.

But...

but 3carriers dont seem bad to me

The Royal Navy has 3 carriers, yes. However, these are merely 21,000 ton VSTOL carriers. I say merely, because the USN fleet carriers displace up to 105,000 tons. They can still project power, but do not make the UK a superpower.

Steele

[BlackStone]

Originally posted by steelehc
Don't get me wrong. I like Britain. America's only true ally, and the only one that has stuck with us for a really long time.

But...



The Royal Navy has 3 carriers, yes. However, these are merely 21,000 ton VSTOL carriers. I say merely, because the USN fleet carriers displace up to 105,000 tons. They can still project power, but do not make the UK a superpower.

Steele

Apparently we have got two of those big buggers on order, won`t see them for another ten years of something, but i`m sure we will have a few wars to make up for that, maybe bomb iceland or something.

[Saint Marcus]

The Royal Navy has 3 carriers, yes. However, these are merely 21,000 ton VSTOL carriers.

Even France's carrier is quite a bit bigger than that (and has Rafale's on board, instead of Harriers). It's sad that the royal navy certainly isn't what it used to be. It's debatable wheter the Brits are even the number 1 naval power in Europe, let alone elsewhere.

[Tingkai]

Re: It took 2 World Wars to Destroy Britain and the Empire

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
I think its the other way round, if the Wars hadn't happend, Britain would have declined MUCH sooner.

So, if it hadnt been for WW1 and 2, britain would have probably fought violently to keep the colonies when they finally rebbelled (a la France), would have declyined economicly, and left other nations to surpass it, which due to war never reached their full potential.

The two wars had three major effects:
1) The loss of one million men in WWI;
2) A massive bill for fighting the wars; and
3) The end of the preferential imperialistic trade routes after WWII.

If the wars do not occur then Britain would gain the economic benefits created by the million men who remain alive. This would maintain the British economy.

The two wars were a massive drain on the British government finances and in turn on the economy. So again, if the wars are not fought then the British economy will likely remain strong or at least have financial reserves to keep growing.

At the end of the WWII, the Brits were forced to end the imperialistic trade system which was essentially an economic union. The end of this system created a major economic shock that forced British industries to restructure, a process that took decades.

I think you are right that if the two wars do not occur then Britain would have been willing to fight to keep its colonies, but would they have had to fight?

WWII showed the world that Asians (i.e. Japan) were capable of winning battles against a white nation. That was a huge boost to people trying to win their independence. If WWII does not occur then recruiting people to fight against colonialism would have been much harder.

Also, events in Asia change. The Chinese were able to regain control of their country following the defeat of Japan. If Japan is not defeated then it is likely that the pre-1941 situation remains intact If China is not independent then there is little chance of Mao winning. If Mao does not win then the Vietnamese lose a major supporter and probably not have defeated the French.

The Vietnamese defeat of the French is a major watershed because it is the first time that a colonial power is overthrown. the victory was used as proof that Europeans could be defeated and helped spark other wars of independence.

After WWII, Europeans also questioned the morality of maintaining colonies and America gains the power to exert its belief of self-determination (FDR and Wilson). So if the wars do not happen then Europeans would have fought harder to maintain their colonies.

[The Andy-Man]

quote:

The Royal Navy has 3 carriers, yes. However, these are merely 21,000 ton VSTOL carriers.



Even France's carrier is quite a bit bigger than that (and has Rafale's on board, instead of Harriers). It's sad that the royal navy certainly isn't what it used to be. It's debatable wheter the Brits are even the number 1 naval power in Europe, let alone elsewhere.''




well, the fench carrier (they have 1 i think) is big but very very expense iand inefficient. And i think it would be fair to say britain has the biggest navy in europe (not buy much though): 3 carriers, 12 subs and quite a few destroyers.



and Tingkai, if WW1 had never have happened, Germany would have industiraly and economicaly surpassed britain totally by 1920, british industry was in big decline also, so withut WW1, Britian would have lost its hold as THE super power, it would have just become a power. number 3 in the world, empire or not. WW1 destroyed ALL its oponents and made them empire lats anothe 20yrs...

[Saint Marcus]

And i think it would be fair to say britain has the biggest navy in

True, but it's quite close...

France

Carriers: 1
Cruisers: 1
Destroyers: 4
Frigates: 20
Corvettes: 10
Submarines: 10

Britain

VSTOL Carriers: 3
Destroyers: 8
Frigates: 21
Submarines: 16

[The Andy-Man]

not that close

and i thought itr was 12 british subs, oh well.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
and Tingkai, if WW1 had never have happened, Germany would have industiraly and economicaly surpassed britain totally by 1920, british industry was in big decline also, so withut WW1, Britian would have lost its hold as THE super power, it would have just become a power. number 3 in the world, empire or not. WW1 destroyed ALL its oponents and made them empire lats anothe 20yrs...

You make the mistake of assuming a zero-sum economic result. Just because Germany gets bigger doesn't mean that Britain gets smaller. The British economy would benefit from the rising German economy. If Germany has more money then it can buy more British goods that adds more money to Britain which can then buy more German goods and an upward spiral is created.

With the stronger British economy, Britain would be better able to maintain its military strength.

Furthermore, WWI did not destroy all of Britain's economic opponents. The Japanese and the U.S. economies are much stronger in 1918 then they were in 1914.

The thesis you initially posed is that if the Wars hadn't happend, Britain would have declined MUCH sooner.

I don't see much evidence to support that claim.

[TCO]

Re: Re: It took 2 World Wars to Destroy Britain and the Empire

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


I hope it will only take 1 1/2 World Wars to destroy the U.S. and their Empire.

Dream on, Mozart-kugel-boy. sounds like you are still smarting from our occupation after WWII.

Give in to your inner Nazi resentments, young Commie...